Southern African Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Southern African Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association

presentation to

Gauteng e-Toll Panel

Midrand, September 8 2014

• SAVRALA welcomes the opportunity to again present

its e-Toll concerns.

• SAVRALA supports the delivery of the Gauteng highway

upgrades, the current ongoing alternate road upgrades and the progress towards a reliable, safe, efficient and economical integrated public transport system.

• Despite its opposition to the GFIP funding method,

SAVRALA members have implemented e-Tolls.

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 2

OVERVIEW

• SAVRALA would like to offer its input to assist the panel assess the

socio economic impact of GFIP e-Tolls as outlined by the invitation;

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 3

WE SUPPORT THE PANEL, AND THE GAUTENG PROVENCE, EFFORTS TO FIND AN EFFICIENT, EFFECTIVE, EQUITABLE AND BROAD BASED ACCEPTABLE GFIP FUNDING SOLUTION OVERVIEW: PANELS GFIP AND ETOLLS SCOPE

DIRECT INDIRECT COSTS

a) Economical and Social Impacts b) Impact on the Environment c) How and where are the costs and benefits distributed across society and the economy

BENEFITS

• 1. SAVRALA - introduction
• 2. “User pay’’ policy observations
• 3. Overview of SANRAL engagement
• 4. The system
• 5. Cost benefit GFIP analysis
• 6. Proposals to consider
• 7. Conclusion

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 4

CONTENT

• Established to ensure that members maintain highest

standards of service, ethical and trading practices.

• Industry is self-regulated and members commit to

SAVRALA’s Constitution and Code of Conduct

(www.savrala.co.za).

• SAVRALA represents members interests and seeks to

constructively engage with its stakeholders.

• National Executive Council (NEC) is drawn from the industry

but retains a General Manager.

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 5

• 1. SAVRALA - INTRODUCTION

• General car rental forecasted statistics - 2014;
• Annual revenue to exceed R5bn
• Average fleet 65,000 (utilisation 72%)
• Annual number of rentals 2,7m
• Some key car rental concerns:
• Increasing cost of new vehicle prices
• Poor driver/renter behavior
• Impact of new Tourism B-BBEE scorecard
• E-toll administration
• Traffic fine/infringement redirection (ie: AARTO)
• Positively engages with stakeholders to find mutually

beneficial solutions

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 6

• 1. SAVRALA – INTRODUCTION (Cont’d)

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 7

• 2. “USER PAY” POLICY OBSERVATION
• Policy suggests a change in behaviour through pricing

Does not respond to ‘usage’ A usage charge for Tourism activity?

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 8

• 2. “USER PAY” POLICY OBSERVATION
• Policy suggests the ‘user’ should pay for a service.

Implies no cross subsidisation for an identified service.

Source: Tax Statistics 2013

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 9

• 2. “USER PAY” POLICY OBSERVATION

Source: Tax Statistics 2013

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 10

• 2. “USER PAY” POLICY OBSERVATION
• Gauteng tax assessed rands has declined from 51.9% (R99bn) to 50.4% (R104bn)
• f growing total, while maintaining a similar 40% proportion of tax payers during

period of GFIP

Source: Tax Statistics 2013

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 11

• 2. “USER PAY” POLICY OBSERVATION

Source: www.beta2.statsa.gov.za

Gauteng remains dominant GDP contributor

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 12

• 2. “USER PAY” POLICY OBSERVATION

Source: www. Treasury.gov.za

Total Vat collections R215bn. At 35% GDP, as a proxy, Gauteng receives back just a little more than its Vat contribution of R75bn. Gauteng’s PIT , Corp tax, fuel levy etc effectively all gets redistributed to other Prov’s.

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 13

• 2. “USER PAY” POLICY OBSERVATION

Motor Vehicle Licence does not recognise actual local or national road (ie: GFIP) usage

Source: www. treasury.gov.za

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 14

• 2. “USER PAY” POLICY OBSERVATION

Source: www. Treasury.gov.za

15

• 2. “USER PAY” POLICY OBSERVATION - SUMMARY
• ‘User pay’ theory offers an approach to change behaviour and manage

resources when reasonable alternatives are available. A narrow view in the context of building a democratic development state is questionable.

• Presidential Review Committee on SOE’s: Recommendation 21

“Funding of social infrastructure, including roads, should have less reliance on the ‘user pay’ principle and more on taxes”

• NDP -2030: Transport (p184)

“Decisions should take South Africa’s developmental goals into consideration and guard against adopting transport approaches not aligned with South Africa’s priorities or resources” “Instead of focusing on a particular transport mode, emphasis should be placed

• n a total transport network”
• Gauteng tax payers contribute for delivery of services in other Provinces
• Gautrain and other modes of public transport (excluding mini bus taxis) are

subsidized by non-users nationally

• Goal must be to develop equitable integrated public transport solutions

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 16

• 3. OVERVIEW OF SANRAL ENGAGEMENT
• Adequately traversed in the various legal records but SAVRALA was

not pro-actively engaged to review the details of the proposed GFIP e-Toll plan.

• SAVRALA introduced RMI and NAAMSA to e-Toll project team.
• SAVRALA members engaged with SANRAL for almost 18 months

prior to legal action.

• Where the system permitted, some changes were made but industry

wanted a simple solution. A proposed daily fee for vehicles, which could be reviewed monthly, was not accepted.

• In other countries, car rental toll fees processed via an intermediary.
• Industry argued need for efficiency and cost effectiveness of funding

solution.

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 17

• 3. OVERVIEW OF SANRAL ENGAGEMENT
• SAVRALA members agreed to adopted parallel actions prior to

launch:

• Support the legal opposition process against e-tolls
• Members to commence tagging of fleet and get e-toll ready
• Since implementation, the e-toll system has generally stabilized

but, as expected, the maintenance of the system remains a challenge

• Once vehicles e-tagged, registered and IT systems integrated, the

system processes transactions, however, the challenge becomes much greater when validation checks etc are applied

• Delivery of late transaction files remains a challenge

Car Rental e-Tag Lifecycle

Order tags and brackets for fleet Register e-tags on TCH Distribute e-tags to various depots Link e-tag and vehicle with TCH Vehicle goes

• n rent and

accumulates toll fees Vehicle returns from

• rent. Check

e-tag present Billing Cycle Vehicle defleeted and tag recycled to a new vehicle

• 4. THE SYSTEM

Billing Cycle

Toll files received daily from Sanral. Owner responsible for payment not user Queries Raised Daily Financial file paid by Car Rental Company When vehicle returns, cumulative toll fees for period linked to vehicle registration Toll fees added to rental within +/- 24 hours of vehicle return Renter invoiced

• 4. THE SYSTEM

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 20

• 4. THE SYSTEM
• Given the movements, car rental fleets have to be e-tagged
• nationally. Some have e-tagged regional fleets.
• E-tag brackets not universal but industry advised one type will be
• used. Remember, industry constantly upfleeting and defleeting,

within 12 months both their own and lease vehicles.

• While smaller members manage manually, larger members

developed new systems to track boxes and individual e-tags between centres.

• Industry had to implement new procedures, policies and training.
• Industry must pay within 7 days while customers pay afterwards.

Accounts/corporate might only pay after 30-60 days after transaction.

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 21

• 4. THE SYSTEM
• Systems then had to cater for exemption categories on a pay now

and claim back later process which is proving to be very cumbersome.

• System requires an e-tag and matching registered vehicle to
• transact. Providing VLN alone will not trigger transactions which will

proceed to VPC.

• SANRAL allocates payment by oldest invoice and not invoice number

which is problematic for account reconciliations.

• Credit request system for cloned plates, old/incorrect eNatis details

and redirecting (individually) charges is very cumbersome

• Billing of e-tolls does cause customer dissatisfaction with so many

tariffs (eg: standard v’s e-tag rate, time of day etc) applicable.

a) Economical and Social Impacts

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 22

• 5. COST BENEFIT GFIP AND ETOLL ANALYSIS

DIRECT INDIRECT COSTS

• Conservatively, members spent R18m
• n preparation costs
• Majority are not covering monthly e-

Toll costs. No reports of revenue surplus

• An additional wage/salary factor
• e-Toll admin costs remain unacceptable

in the face of alternative collection method

• Addressing customer billing
• queries. Fleet card only payment

conduit

• Dispute resolution takes long
• Clients purchasing tracking

systems to validate e-toll charges

• Invoicing is delayed
• Employee fringe benefit tax

unclear BENEFITS

• Members unable to substantiate
• No evidence presented by

Government/Gauteng/SANRAL to demonstrate claimed 8,4 : 1 economic benefits which motivated the project

• People consider travelling more
• n GFIP
• No evidence to suggest that

vehicle wear and tear has improved on GFIP (note: impact

• f alternate routes on vehicle)

a) Impact on the Environment

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 23

• 5. COST BENEFIT GFIP AND ETOLL ANALYSIS

DIRECT INDIRECT COSTS

• While key accounts benefit from
• nline integration, individual e-toll

transaction and dispute system is predominantly paper based

• In the absence of alternate incentives,

new roads just create induced demand

• Emissions on alternate routes due

to congestion will exceed previous levels

• System does not distinguish

between low and high CO2 emitting vehicles BENEFITS

• Unaware of any substantiation of

claimed emission/ environmental improvements due to GFIP as per project motivation

• No evaluation to identify if road users

spend more quality time at home

• Note: Vehicles are constantly

improving their CO2 emissions. Cleaner fuel would improve this further

• No empirical evidence to suggest

that road safety has improved or decreased

a) How and where are the costs and benefits distributed across society and the economy

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 24

• 5. COST BENEFIT GFIP AND ETOLL ANALYSIS

DIRECT INDIRECT COSTS

• E-tolls, as a separate charge, has

increased the overall cost of car rental.

• Leasing members, are often

intermediaries, and are absorbing costs while trying to resolve queries and streamline processes.

• Addressing customer billing

queries

• Suppliers will start to pass their

costs on to members

• Creates further cost

/maintenance burdens on alternate routes

• Employment for staff at SANRAL

BENEFITS

• Members unable to substantiate

claimed benefits

• Revenue from SANRAL e-Toll

expenditure

• Opportunity to use the

technology for law enforcement

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 25

• 6. PROPOSALS TO CONSIDER

6.1 Identify the objective to be achieved:

URBAN GFIP UPGRADE

FUNDING

Fiscal transfer Shadow Tolling National road (?) funded locally Motor Veh Lic Fuel Levy

National or Inland DECONGESTION

Public Transport

Alternate Routes

Urban Planning Incentives

• The primary objective to achieve has very separate dependencies
• Funding solution should be driven by efficiency and a clear strategy to achieve

an integrated and funded public transport system

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 26

• 6. PROPOSALS TO CONSIDER

6.2 Pro-actively engage key stakeholders in advance Learnings from current e-toll implementation:

• Publication of a Government Gazette and a few small ads cannot be

regarded as reasonable notice and consultation for major projects. (The law is sometimes blind when looking for a reasonable man!)

• Ref N1/N2 Winelands study in 2001
• Pro-actively engage appropriate representatives from business,

community and labour on plans with significant impact, not just inter-government

• Public representatives must represent the interests of their

constituents eg: could Gauteng Provincial government also have done more to highlight e-Toll concerns much sooner?

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 27

• 6. PROPOSALS TO CONSIDER

6.3 Regulatory Impact Assessment’s (RIA) should be the norm not the exception Learnings from current e-toll implementation:

• The risk of AARTO non-compliance/non-implementation was

identified as a GFIP project risk but overlooked

• A RIA would have highlighted the non e-toll payment prosecutorial

risk (eg: AARTO v’s CPA) and the need to focus on building eNatis accuracy with the help of vehicle owners

• 6. 4 Investigate appointment of an Independent Regulator to assess

appropriateness and fairness of general toll rates and policy

• Current SANRAL regulator is Dept of Transport - its shareholder
• Toll revenues on some concessions may need to support local

authorities due to toll avoidance and impact on alternate routes

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 28

• 6. PROPOSALS TO CONSIDER

6.4 GFIP technology can be used for non Gauteng e-toll purposes If urban e-Tolls in Gauteng are discontinued

• Both private and commercial (eg: truck and car fleets) road users

may still choose to use an e-tag when using long haul routes

• E-tag could become a method of payment for a road user

eg: use of e-tags to replace cash in parking centres, lic renewal

• Gantries can be used for average speed over distance enforcement

while creating incentives for people who comply

• We now need the same (and more) focus for Road Safety
• Explore commercial opportunities for e-Toll call centre and

Customer Service Centres

• Challenge will be to restore trust in any alternate potential use,

particularly, if technology remains within SANRAL

• Refunds unlikely

29

• 6. PROPOSALS TO CONSIDER

6.5 Allow SANRAL to be the competent road building focussed agency

• As we continue to build a democratic development state, SANRAL

should build and maintain key arteries as directed by Government

• National routes must be viewed as benefitting the country,
• therwise, their status should be changed. A good national

network has national economic multiplier effects.

• Re-align ‘user pay’ policy conversation in terms of roads:
• National routes should be financially supported by the national

fiscus from a national fuel levy funds etc. SANRAL’s own studies acknowledged the superiority of fiscal transfers. Current e-toll funding model has unacceptable collection costs.

• Provincial routes should look to their Motor Veh Lic fees and, if

required, a temporary additional fuel levy to assist fund public transport development. Transfers must be viewed strategially.

• The focus on road building must match integrated public transport

SAVRALA presentation to Gauteng e-Toll Panel 8 September 2014 30

• 7. CONCLUSION
• Gauteng, as an expanding economic hub has now made, what

were national routes decades ago, local commuting highways.

• Our conversation must move from ‘Gauteng’s roads, Gauteng’s

debt’ to ‘Gauteng’s national roads are South Africa’s roads’.

• SAVRALA members have e-tagged their fleet and are processing

e-toll charges but would prefer an alternative funding method given the current administrative challenges.

• SAVRALA believes that the current e-toll impasse is an
• pportunity to make tomorrow so much better than today

WE THANK YOU QUESTIONS